I want my Farke back

[repman 691]

14 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

That's what the Athletic article stated, he wanted a Skipp and Buendia replacement and a marquee centre-back.

Arguably Rashica filled one of those requests. The other two he had to swing for.

We needed so much more than that though. The one question I do have is whether there was an agreement between Webber and Farke to change the playing style, which the recruitment certainly tried to enable, or if the squad was put together by Webber with the expectation the style would change. 

[TheBaldOne66 768]

Whilst I get the love in for Farke, which I personally think is quite sad tbh, there are two fundamental questions to ask for me:

 

1. What guarantee is there he could win the Championship again with a squad, which he helped assemble, but have been dreadful all season, and,

 

2. If he is so good, why is he currently out of work as he has been since he left Krasnodar? 

[canarydan23 4,635]

33 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Both decisions were actually correct. Marginal, but indeed correct. If you're dead in front of the goalie, you will always be pinged for being in active play. The unusual thing about that was that Leicester didn't keep their defenders on the post (Castaigne pushed straight out and just about got Todd offside in time).

The one against Arsenal was half-a-yard on, remember that the bounce which trickled to Aubameyang is the point at which the decision had to be made, and there he was clearly on. Remember, the shot hit the post, hit the guy who hit the shot as he slid in, bounced off his shin - and the decision is made on Aubameyang's position at that point.

Again, an unusual set of circumstances, but not a matter of incompetence.


 

I forgot you're the cognitive dissonance, refs can do no wrong poster.

You can be offside from a ball coming back off the post. If you don't think Aubameyang was gaining an advantage by being stood where he was, rather than behind Aarons, when the balls came back off the post then I don't really know what to tell you.

And then to think that Cantwell gained an advantage by standing where he was you'd need to believe that he was actively impeding the goalkeeper, and therefore if Cantwell was removed from his position then Schmeichel would have made the save. Again, if that's the case I don't really know what to tell you either. Particularly as I distinctly remember, but cannot recall the match, a similar thing happening a week or two later and the goal standing.

And for balance, Dean Smith was also shafted by the incredible inconsistencies and gross incompetence around this rule at Elland Road in March when Bamford was ridiculously ruled to be not intervening with play despite preventing Kabak from being in a position to prevent the goal.

Edited May 9, 2022 by canarydan23

[TheBaldOne66 768]

1 minute ago, repman said:

We needed so much more than that though. The one question I do have is whether there was an agreement between Webber and Farke to change the playing style, which the recruitment certainly tried to enable, or if the squad was put together by Webber with the expectation the style would change. 

That topic was mentioned in todays Q &A, and Farke wanted Rashica, Normann, PLM, Sargent so he is partly to blame for the dross we endured this season

[repman 691]

1 minute ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

That topic was mentioned in todays Q &A, and Farke wanted Rashica, Normann, PLM, Sargent so he is partly to blame for the dross we endured this season

Hadn't seen that but it certainly doesn't surprise me, Farke was clearly involved in recruitment to some extent from the moment he joined the club. In fact I think I recall a Webber interview from the early days where he mentioned that the scouting team was in the process of being rebuilt, hence a lot of our signings coming from Germany in his first year. 

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,234]

I loved the guy but his style of football is never going to work for us in the modern PL. It is too slow and patient and too passive off the ball, it relies heavily on individual brilliance in the final third and a top quality DM to cut out the opposition just running through us on the break unchallenged. 

You'd need a team near in quality to a  Southampton/Brighton/Wolves to get away with playing possession football in this league which we can't afford and the less said about his half in half out compromised style employed at the start of this season the better.

It won't be as fun next season in the Championship under Smith and actually getting promoted will be more of a struggle, but if we do get promoted again and after he's had a couple of transfer windows to bring in some more aggressive, mental stronger players with more pace and power we will definitely make a better fist of it than we have done the last two seasons. 

[TheGunnShow 7,079]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

I forgot you're the cognitive dissonance, refs can do no wrong poster.

You can be offside from a ball coming back off the post. If you don't think Aubameyang was gaining an advantage by being stood where he was, rather than behind Aarons, when the balls came back off the post then I don't really know what to tell you.

And then to think that Cantwell gained an advantage by standing where he was you'd need to believe that he was actively impeding the goalkeeper, and therefore if Cantwell was removed from his position then Schmeichel would have made the save. Again, if that's the case I don't really know what to tell you either. Particularly as I distinctly remember, but cannot recall the match, a similar thing happening a week or two later and the goal standing.

And for balance, Dean Smith was also shafted by the incredible inconsistencies and gross incompetence around this rule at Elland Road in March when Bamford was ridiculously ruled to be not intervening with play despite preventing Kabak from being in a position to prevent the goal.

Except the ball hit the Arsenal player after it hit the post so that's considered to be playing the ball, and that's when the offside decision is made. Ergo, he's onside (hence the screenshot which made it crystal clear that Aubameyang was onside). People were getting mixed up on that one as when the initial shot was hit, Aubameyang was off. However, the ball hit the near post, hit the player who shot and only then did it go anywhere near Aubameyang. That was clearly onside. Freakish set of circumstances which I don't remember seeing often, but onside. 

As for the Cantwell case, if you're stood in front of the keeper and you are in an offside position when a shot comes in, you should be called offside if you're ahead of the second last defender to boot as by standing in front of the goalie, you're deemed to be in active play. Which match did the reverse happen? If that was the case, then the error was made in that match, not ours.

There's a big difference between incompetence in refereeing and a bad law, which is what offside has become with the amendments it has had made to it. However, the unknowing conflate the two. The clear offside that someone got wrong was actually the goal Everton scored against us as when Krul knocked the cross away, Ben Godfrey was right on top of him when the cross came in and all Norwich defenders had pushed out.

But the Leicester and Arsenal decisions were absolutely correct.

EDIT: Always read the IFAB decisions on top of the Laws of Football, as they basically act as the cornerstone of how referees are supposed to interpret the Laws as they are written. A lot simply read the Laws and then interpret them their way.

Edited May 9, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[ncfcstar 321]

3 hours ago, Matt Morriss said:

I was never baying for his blood and never wanted him to be sacked. The problem is Smith, Webber, the owners and the recruitment.

If Farke was the problem then Smith would have come in and we would have seen a significant improvement. We have not, and in fact we have gone backwards. The state of the team now under Smith is far worse than Farke.

People dont analyse the situation under Farke enough. They only look at the league position and the 7-0's by Chelsea etc.

Farke had just lost his best 2 players in Skipp and Buendia, along with highly influential squad players instrumental in the success he attained over the last 3 years, in Tettey, Vrancic, Hernandez and Stiepermann with Cantwell deciding to disappear also after an excellent season. Thats 7 players ripped out of the team that gained us so much success. 7 players. Not just Skipp and Emi, 7 players.

Farke then had utter dross to work with replacing the above, with Gilmour, PLM, Rashica, Sargent, Placheta, Tzolis and Normann. With only Normann showing any real promise early season before injury.

Along with Williams, Gunn and Kabak Farke had 9 new players to get to gel, into an entirely new system forced upon him with the players sold and bought by Webber. We had to play a 433 to accomodate the loss of Buendia and new wide players, and also to ensure Gilmour got game time.

It all failed catastropically, but Farkes hand was forced. 

You do not go from dominating the Championship, twice, to failing so badly in the Prem, because you are a bad manager. Both times the recruitment has failed Farke. The first season the recruitment was non existent and we only had a competitive first 11, when you clearly need 15-20 first teamers to compete in the Prem. Hence when injuries struck we collapsed. This 2nd season the players bought by Webber simply havent worked at all. Webbers decision to buy Bundesliga 2 forwards that just got Werder Bremen relegated with a handful of goals and assists between them, along with a raw greek lad clearly not ready, was a massive gamble and its no surprise it hasnt worked.

Farke was never the problem and should never have been sacked. Our current position and performances under Smith confirm that. 

 

Maybe you didn't, but plenty did.

There weren't many complaints around Tettey, Vrancic, Hernandez and Stiepermann leaving/being loaned out at the beginning of the season, nor were there that many around our summer recruitment (aside from the obvious hole that Skipp left, which I always considered to be the biggest challenge we would face this season).

It's all well and good having hindsight to benefit your position, and I'm not suggesting you don't make good points.  The point is though, at the time of the Farke dismissal the majority had already turned, you could tell it was getting close to being very poisonous at the ground and the sacking after the Brentford game gave the club the international break to reset.  Was Smith the right appointment?  Possibly not, but if he was on Webber's 'unobtainable until available' list then I'm fine with the club going after him.

I agree that whatever comes out in the wash of this season has to lay at the feet of the Sporting Director, they are his signings and his appointment.  I don't agree that Farke should 'never have been sacked', his position had become untenable whether that was his fault or not.

Edited May 9, 2022 by ncfcstar

[Monty13 2,684]

3 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

The recent Athletic article put paid to this myth; I can't find it now but there was a thread last week about it. Unless it was a work of fiction, then the article proffered that Farke was unhappy with the recruitment, felt a squad had been assembled that had little chance of survival and let that belief permeate into his players and favoured a quantity over quality approach. Not shining him in a particularly great light with the negativity side of things, but certainly indicates he had next to nothing to do with the incoming players.

I don’t think the fact he was unhappy with it necessarily means he wasn’t involved Dan, but it does suggest he was at minimum overruled.

He’s been proven right in the long run but the recruitment and then his negative dealing with it ultimately cost him his job.

Makes me wonder if he’d been stronger in his objections in the summer whether he’d still be here.

[Monty13 2,684]

2 hours ago, Orly said:

Perhaps you're right, but I don't see how him throwing his toys out the pram was going to change or help anything?  

Is there any firm evidence regarding his involvement in the transfer process other than conjecture?  I.e. statements from the club or Daniel himself?  (Not that it really matters I suppose, as we won't reappoint him)

He had massive leverage, a fan favourite Manager, second championship title, apparently much admired by the owners. He also was due a contract renewal which he got.

It’s not about toys out of the pram, but as I said he could and arguably should have stuck to his apparent convictions and made a stand. I don’t believe for a second if say hypothetically he told Webber that if he sold Buendia he would walk, that wouldn’t have given Webber a massive headache and pause for thought on his plan.

What seems as if happened big picture from Baileys article, although we still don’t know the specifics, is that Farke had his beliefs on what we should have done this summer (quality over quantity) and I personally believe if true he was right. But despite being in that leveraged position he ended up losing Buendia and with a whole bunch of players he didn’t want but a his own shiny new contract. Then instead of making the best of it he then proceeded to destroy the morale of the squad and curtail any remaining small chance of defying the odds.

That’s my personal reading from what has been suggested by Bailey and others and that’s why personally despite being utterly annoyed at Webber I’m still massively disappointed in Farke.

[repman 691]

1 minute ago, Monty13 said:

He had massive leverage, a fan favourite Manager, second championship title, apparently much admired by the owners. He also was due a contract renewal which he got.

It’s not about toys out of the pram, but as I said he could and arguably should have stuck to his apparent convictions and made a stand. I don’t believe for a second if say hypothetically he told Webber that if he sold Buendia he would walk, that wouldn’t have given Webber a massive headache and pause for thought on his plan.

What seems as if happened big picture from Baileys article, although we still don’t know the specifics, is that Farke had his beliefs on what we should have done this summer (quality over quantity) and I personally believe if true he was right. But despite being in that leveraged position he ended up losing Buendia and with a whole bunch of players he didn’t want but a his own shiny new contract. Then instead of making the best of it he then proceeded to destroy the morale of the squad and curtail any remaining small chance of defying the odds.

That’s my personal reading from what has been suggested by Bailey and others and that’s why personally despite being utterly annoyed at Webber I’m still massively disappointed in Farke.

If we had gone with Farke's supposed wish of only 3 signings, and had an injury crisis half as bad as the one we had in 19/20, we would have suffered the same fate. The squad depth was either non existent (we played a central midfielder at left back for a long time) or not of sufficient quality having already failed once in the prem.

[Monty13 2,684]

1 minute ago, repman said:

If we had gone with Farke's supposed wish of only 3 signings, and had an injury crisis half as bad as the one we had in 19/20, we would have suffered the same fate. The squad depth was either non existent (we played a central midfielder at left back for a long time) or not of sufficient quality having already failed once in the prem.

Possibly, but one route was destined to fail the other was reliant on chance. I’d rather have took the chance of success than none personally.

[Nuff Said 5,751]

3 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

And also as has already been said, this is how DoF models work.

It sounds like they tried and failed to act on Farke's requests, again from another Athletic article, they refused to pay the market value for Andrich to fill the DM role, failed to match Brentford's valuation for Ajer, nor would they put forward offers sufficient enough to entice St Juste and Bournaw's clubs to sell.

Had Farke's requests been granted, it's unlikely we'd be in the position we are now, yet it's he who was the fall guy for Webber's incompetence.

I mean, what are you envisaging here, Farke stomping into the boardroom and throwing his toys out of the pram? We don't know that he didn't, to be fair. And given how his sacking was handled and his reported overt attitude regarding recruitment, it sounds like he did something to rattle Webber's cage, so I'd be careful with the assumption he meekly accepted the dross squad Webber assembled for him.

There’s something in what you say, but to make out that Farke was some kind of wronged figure who would have kept us up if only he’d been given players a little bit above the level we actually signed, is speculative in the extreme. 

[Worthy Nigelton 1,232]

4 hours ago, Fiery Zac said:

Youre talking about now, and the past - im actually talking about what was being discussed - the first 4 games of the season.

Arsenal were not looking anything like a top 4 team at the beginning of the season. Look at their starting 11 that day, and their performances. Yes they're now a very good side, but we're not talking about now. The claim was we 'played the 4 of the best teams in the league'. 

I never said it doesn't apply to Leicester. Stop making it up as you go along!

 

Very simply - We did not play 4 of the best teams in the league at the start of the season. We played by far the best 2 and, at the time, two struggling biggish teams who were still very much finding their feet in the season. We were so poor we couldn't capitalise on their frailties. So the excuse of playing the best teams doesn't wash (imo)

Yes but in order to finish as high as they are going to, Arsenal have had to come good at some point and that was probably against us. It all levels out at the end of the season and your argument is flawed because of this. The next team Everton or Burnley play would expect to win even though those teams have picked up form recently, and the reason they would expect to win is because Everton and Burnley are not very good, hence their league position over the season. 

[canarydan23 4,635]

51 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

There’s something in what you say, but to make out that Farke was some kind of wronged figure who would have kept us up if only he’d been given players a little bit above the level we actually signed, is speculative in the extreme. 

Speculating is what we do. Sadly we don't need to speculate as to how good a job Smith would have done, as we've seen it. And if he wasn't happy with the squad, then perhaps he was too supine for a football coach to accept the no January additions condition?

[canarydan23 4,635]

2 hours ago, Monty13 said:

I don’t think the fact he was unhappy with it necessarily means he wasn’t involved Dan, but it does suggest he was at minimum overruled.

He’s been proven right in the long run but the recruitment and then his negative dealing with it ultimately cost him his job.

Makes me wonder if he’d been stronger in his objections in the summer whether he’d still be here.

Or perhaps it was his objections that cost him his job. We know how sensitive Webber is to criticism, he's shown us all quite publicly.

[canarydan23 4,635]

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

Except the ball hit the Arsenal player after it hit the post so that's considered to be playing the ball, and that's when the offside decision is made. Ergo, he's onside (hence the screenshot which made it crystal clear that Aubameyang was onside). People were getting mixed up on that one as when the initial shot was hit, Aubameyang was off. However, the ball hit the near post, hit the player who shot and only then did it go anywhere near Aubameyang. That was clearly onside. Freakish set of circumstances which I don't remember seeing often, but onside. 

As for the Cantwell case, if you're stood in front of the keeper and you are in an offside position when a shot comes in, you should be called offside if you're ahead of the second last defender to boot as by standing in front of the goalie, you're deemed to be in active play. Which match did the reverse happen? If that was the case, then the error was made in that match, not ours.

There's a big difference between incompetence in refereeing and a bad law, which is what offside has become with the amendments it has had made to it. However, the unknowing conflate the two. The clear offside that someone got wrong was actually the goal Everton scored against us as when Krul knocked the cross away, Ben Godfrey was right on top of him when the cross came in and all Norwich defenders had pushed out.

But the Leicester and Arsenal decisions were absolutely correct.

EDIT: Always read the IFAB decisions on top of the Laws of Football, as they basically act as the cornerstone of how referees are supposed to interpret the Laws as they are written. A lot simply read the Laws and then interpret them their way.

If you think the Arsenal goal would have counted if the badges were flipped, I've got a lovely bridge for sale for you.

[TheGunnShow 7,079]

45 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

If you think the Arsenal goal would have counted if the badges were flipped, I've got a lovely bridge for sale for you.

Which is irrelevant (and purely hypothetical), the question here is the application of Law as it stands, which was absolutely correct.

If you were to say the offside rule is a shambling mess due to changes made to it, and that it's made harder to use as a result, then I totally agree. That's a different matter altogether.

[ron obvious 1,654]

10 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

What technical flair? We've got no technical flair to lose, we've a squad full of mediocre old cloggers.

Utter tripe. We've got plenty of flair players for the Champs, which is the level we'll be playing at.

A couple of mediocre (PL level) cloggers might actually have helped this season.

[Captain Holt 580]

5 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

That's what the Athletic article stated, he wanted a Skipp and Buendia replacement and a marquee centre-back.

Arguably Rashica filled one of those requests. The other two he had to swing for.

Arguably? Literally nobody would argue he was a Buendia replacement. It was all over the media before he kicked a ball that he was nothing like Buendia.

[Drazen Muzinic 1,476]

9 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Jesus. Have we now the reached the stage of “why aren’t we Luton?”. 😕
 

😉

The Binners would give one of their shirt stars to be Luton right now😁

[Drazen Muzinic 1,476]

Anyone else read the thread title to the tune of Those Were The Days (Mary Hopkin song, not the delusional website) in their head and the words We Want Our Barclay Back?

Ah, memories of 91/92 - how can that be 30 (THIRTY) years ago?

Just me? Ok, time for my Horlicks and meds - Nurse!

[canarydan23 4,635]

1 hour ago, Captain Holt said:

Arguably? Literally nobody would argue he was a Buendia replacement. It was all over the media before he kicked a ball that he was nothing like Buendia.

Literally nobody. Except....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11709/12339280/norwich-sign-milot-rashica-from-werder-bremen-for-9-4m-to-replace-emiliano-buendia

https://www.thesweepsports.com/norwich-citys-new-kosovan-superstar-milot-rashica/

Edited May 9, 2022 by canarydan23

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

2 hours ago, ron obvious said:

Utter tripe. We've got plenty of flair players for the Champs, which is the level we'll be playing at.

A couple of mediocre (PL level) cloggers might actually have helped this season.

Josh Sargent suddenly turns into Trossard in the Champs then does he?

I suppose you are right to an extent, albeit a limited extent... Dowell doesn't stand out as much for being sluggish and one-paced in the level below. 

Edited May 9, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Captain Holt 580]

10 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Literally nobody. Except....

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11709/12339280/norwich-sign-milot-rashica-from-werder-bremen-for-9-4m-to-replace-emiliano-buendia

https://www.thesweepsports.com/norwich-citys-new-kosovan-superstar-milot-rashica/

Any sources except lazy nationals?

Check any pinkun article or anything from Michael Bailey.

[canarydan23 4,635]

14 minutes ago, Captain Holt said:

Any sources except lazy nationals?

Check any pinkun article or anything from Michael Bailey.

Right. So when you said "literally nobody" you didn't actually mean "literally nobody". Gotcha. It can be hard to keep up.

And also, check this interview with Dan O'Hagan....

"Is he an Emi Buendia replacement? 

DH: “I think Rashica is quite similar to Buendia. It’s almost a like-for-like exchange. For me Rashica, on his day, is as good a player as Buendia is. 

“A year ago clubs like Napoli, AC Milan and Villa were all keen on him. For Norwich to get their man it shows Norwich can compete for players that are in demand. 

“He had a very poor 18 months to end his career in a poor Bremen team but before then he was fairly prolific – eight and nine goals in the seasons before. 

“He’s a player with an eye for goal – there's a lot of Buendia is Rashica and I think Webber has seen this as a like-for-like."

...an interview conducted and published by the PinkUn!

Edited May 10, 2022 by canarydan23

[Matt Morriss 69]

18 hours ago, ncfcstar said:

Maybe you didn't, but plenty did.

There weren't many complaints around Tettey, Vrancic, Hernandez and Stiepermann leaving/being loaned out at the beginning of the season, nor were there that many around our summer recruitment (aside from the obvious hole that Skipp left, which I always considered to be the biggest challenge we would face this season).

It's all well and good having hindsight to benefit your position, and I'm not suggesting you don't make good points.  The point is though, at the time of the Farke dismissal the majority had already turned, you could tell it was getting close to being very poisonous at the ground and the sacking after the Brentford game gave the club the international break to reset.  Was Smith the right appointment?  Possibly not, but if he was on Webber's 'unobtainable until available' list then I'm fine with the club going after him.

I agree that whatever comes out in the wash of this season has to lay at the feet of the Sporting Director, they are his signings and his appointment.  I don't agree that Farke should 'never have been sacked', his position had become untenable whether that was his fault or not.

If plenty did and not many complained about Tettey et al leaving, that doesnt automatically make their views right.

Those who failed to see the impact of the 4 players leaving at the same time as Emi and Skipp,  in my opinion failed to grasp the bigger picture. 

I was of the opinion from day one that losing those 4, and maybe even throw in Hugill, along with Skipp and Emi and replacing with a bunch of unknowns, 2 of which failed to stop their club from being relegated to Bundesliga2, was going to cause problems and I was thinking of the time Fulham came up and bought a whole new team, which didnt work at all.

Again just because people werent complaining about players leaving, and many were baying for Farke blood, doesnt make them right. For me, arrogantly or otherwise, it shows a lack of football knowledge, and I think i am right to have held those opinions, and believe they are still right.

The fact we are bottom by a country mile after a truly pathetic attempt to turn things around under Dean Smith proves, in my mind, that my initial fears were correct.

We should have never sacked Farke as he clearly wasnt the problem and I had faith in him to turn it around, just like he turned it around post Maddison & Murphys when Pukki, Stiepermann and Co came in. Took a while to get going and Farke had to tinker (dropping Rhodes, pushing Pukki up top and bringing in Stiepermann in the hole, which clicked brilliantly). 

Do those who were convinced sacking Farke was needed actually stop and think about the fact Farke lost 6 integral players, key to winning the Championship, had 9 new players to gel, 5 of which had ZERO english football experience, let alone Prem, and 2 of which just got Werder Bremen relegated to Bundesliga 2 with a pi$$ poor goals and assists tally. Chuck in Tzolis, who has been a spectacular flop, and a contract clause Gilmour, which probably caused tensions when Farke refused to play him. And to top it off we have the most horrendous fixture list to start the season.

Do the Farke bashers seriously believe none of the above were huge factors and it was all Farke and he had to go? Sorry, but I think those who believe that lack football nous. 

We should have also never let the 6 leave, although obviously Emi and Skipp was always going to difficult to hold onto. But with them going, the other 4 definitely shouldnt have. Far too much squad upheaval and reliance placed on players, new to English football, let alone the Prem.

We should have retained the majority of the squad that won the Championship, like we did the first time round (that went onto to beat Man City 3-2 and Newcastle 3-0, but fell apart when injuries decimated the team) and invested the Buendia money on 3 players in the £20m range to replace Skipp, Emi and bring in another striker. 

Instead we spread it thin across 9 new players, of varying Prem experience, 5 of which had no english football experience at all (adding in Normann at Brighton as he didnt play 1 game). The only good bit of planning was the Gilmour signing, who we all thought would do well and really shoud have done better, but really hasnt at all and still has worse stats than Vrancic, 34 games in. 

And this was the masterplan to keep us in the Premier Legaue? and surprise surprise when it didnt bloody work we sacked Farke as it must have been him that was the problem. To top it off we bring in a manager who was performing so terribly at Villa after spending £200m that they were relegation candidates like us, and he was rightly sacked.

A truly pathetically executed Premier League survival gameplan by Stuart Webber, wrong decisions made continually from day one back in June 2021, Gilmour aside. 

[ncfcstar 321]

59 minutes ago, Matt Morriss said:

If plenty did and not many complained about Tettey et al leaving, that doesnt automatically make their views right.

Those who failed to see the impact of the 4 players leaving at the same time as Emi and Skipp,  in my opinion failed to grasp the bigger picture. 

I was of the opinion from day one that losing those 4, and maybe even throw in Hugill, along with Skipp and Emi and replacing with a bunch of unknowns, 2 of which failed to stop their club from being relegated to Bundesliga2, was going to cause problems and I was thinking of the time Fulham came up and bought a whole new team, which didnt work at all.

Again just because people werent complaining about players leaving, and many were baying for Farke blood, doesnt make them right. For me, arrogantly or otherwise, it shows a lack of football knowledge, and I think i am right to have held those opinions, and believe they are still right.

The fact we are bottom by a country mile after a truly pathetic attempt to turn things around under Dean Smith proves, in my mind, that my initial fears were correct.

We should have never sacked Farke as he clearly wasnt the problem and I had faith in him to turn it around, just like he turned it around post Maddison & Murphys when Pukki, Stiepermann and Co came in. Took a while to get going and Farke had to tinker (dropping Rhodes, pushing Pukki up top and bringing in Stiepermann in the hole, which clicked brilliantly). 

Do those who were convinced sacking Farke was needed actually stop and think about the fact Farke lost 6 integral players, key to winning the Championship, had 9 new players to gel, 5 of which had ZERO english football experience, let alone Prem, and 2 of which just got Werder Bremen relegated to Bundesliga 2 with a pi$$ poor goals and assists tally. Chuck in Tzolis, who has been a spectacular flop, and a contract clause Gilmour, which probably caused tensions when Farke refused to play him. And to top it off we have the most horrendous fixture list to start the season.

Do the Farke bashers seriously believe none of the above were huge factors and it was all Farke and he had to go? Sorry, but I think those who believe that lack football nous. 

We should have also never let the 6 leave, although obviously Emi and Skipp was always going to difficult to hold onto. But with them going, the other 4 definitely shouldnt have. Far too much squad upheaval and reliance placed on players, new to English football, let alone the Prem.

We should have retained the majority of the squad that won the Championship, like we did the first time round (that went onto to beat Man City 3-2 and Newcastle 3-0, but fell apart when injuries decimated the team) and invested the Buendia money on 3 players in the £20m range to replace Skipp, Emi and bring in another striker. 

Instead we spread it thin across 9 new players, of varying Prem experience, 5 of which had no english football experience at all (adding in Normann at Brighton as he didnt play 1 game). The only good bit of planning was the Gilmour signing, who we all thought would do well and really shoud have done better, but really hasnt at all and still has worse stats than Vrancic, 34 games in. 

And this was the masterplan to keep us in the Premier Legaue? and surprise surprise when it didnt bloody work we sacked Farke as it must have been him that was the problem. To top it off we bring in a manager who was performing so terribly at Villa after spending £200m that they were relegation candidates like us, and he was rightly sacked.

A truly pathetically executed Premier League survival gameplan by Stuart Webber, wrong decisions made continually from day one back in June 2021, Gilmour aside. 

I don't disagree with most of your post, but the point remains that when Farke was sacked the general feeling was that he was lucky he was still in a job after the Leeds game.  So regardless of what led up to that point, and where the blame lies, I do not think many were shocked that the sacking happened (or wouldn't have been if it had happened in the build up to the Brentford game).

[wcorkcanary 4,608]

On 09/05/2022 at 10:04, TeemuVanBasten said:

Paul Warne for me, and he can bring Ogbene with him.

 

Ogbene yes . Defo. Kids got something. PW .... like the idea and in some ways not as much of a gamble as  DF was when he arrived so wouldnt be averse , would be a fairytale story if he was a success here. Still willing to give Smithy 10-12 games to show how hes gonna play us  in the Champs... if its crud , he has to go as i wasnt keen on him from the start  but once employed was willing to see what he could do, not much it seems. 12 games into next season it should be clear where we're at  and how its looking. 

Think the DF ship has sailed.  

[Nexus_Canary 1,156]

Well we best get a move on before the ship sales 😕 

https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/blackburn-rovers-farke-lennon-odds-23904874